2018 (9) TMI 501

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hari, Advocate for the Respondent ORDER Per Rachna Gupta: Present is an appeal filed against the order No. 99/2015 dated 30.3.15. The appellant herein is engaged in the activity of construction of commercial/ industrial /institutional buildings and is registered with the department with effect from March, 2009 under the category of 'Works Contract services'. The department alleged short /....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n appeal. 2. We have heard Shri G R Singh, learned DR appearing for the department and Shri Alok Kothari, learned advocate appearing for the respondent- assessee. 3. It is submitted by the department that Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in allowing the benefit of composite scheme as the assessee had failed to file an option within the time frame as per the provisions of composite scheme. Al....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ability under composite scheme. Therefore the benefit has rightly been granted. Appeal is accordingly prayed to be dismissed. 5. Respondent has relied upon the following judgements: (i) Satish Kumar and Co. vs. CCE & ST, Jaipur [Final Order No. 52265/2018 dated 20.6.2018]; (ii) M/s. Tridot Engineers vs. CCE Jaipur [Final Order No. 55945-55946/2016 dt. 16.12.2016]; (iii) Larsen & ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....allenge. While relying upon the decision of ABL Infrastructure Pvt Ltd. vs. CCE, Nashik [2015 (38) STR 1185 (Tri-Mum)] and another decision of this Tribunal in the case of Bridge and Roof Co. (India) Ltd. vs. CCE Jaipur [2012 (27) STR 406] wherein even non-fulfillment of condition of exercising option for payment of tax under Composition Scheme was found to be not appropriate ground for denial of ....